Connect with us

archive

DiFi attacks new media journalists

Sen. Dianne Feinstein wants to define as a ‚??journalist‚?Ě only those in Main Stream Media.

This article originally appeared on watchdog.com.

A year ago California voters gave Sen. Dianne Feinstein another landslide victory even though she refused to debate her opponent, Elizabeth Emken, who for once¬†was a decent GOP candidate. DiFi must believe she‚??s in the¬†House of Lords.

Now Baroness DiFi¬†wants to define as a ‚??journalist‚?̬†only those in MainStream Media. New media would be considered peons with no First Amendment protections. Matt Drudge, the most famous and influential of the New Media Journalists,¬†tweeted that she was a ‚??Fascist.‚?Ě

What‚??s so great about the MainStream Media anyway? In 2003, Judith Miller of the august New York Times, the most prestigious newspaper ever,¬†stovepiped¬†lies about Saddam Hussein‚??s ‚??weapons of mass destruction‚?Ě from the Republican Bush administration into the pages of her newspaper.

Then there was the infamous Pulitzer Prize that went to the MSM‚??s second most influential paper, the Washington Post, for a manufactured story by Janet Cooke, ‚??Jimmy‚??s World,‚?Ě about a supposed 8-year-old heroin addict.

Baroness DiFi‚??s position is especially embarrassing for Silicon Valley, whose billionaire investors mostly backed her. They‚??ve built the infrastructure of alternative media that, finally, take us outside the government-MainStream Media axis, and their own senator stabs them in the back! Baroness DiFi still wants to live in the Dark Ages of 1993, the year before the Web Awakening of 1994.

Journalists join government

But it is understandable why Baroness DiFi takes that view. As Breitbart reported, 15 journalists (using the Baroness DiFi definition) have joined the Obama administration.

And just last week Katy Grimes¬†reported here on CalWatchDog.com¬†on how more than a dozen state journalists now work for the California state government‚??s multitudinous departments and bureaus. Just a snippet from that article:

‚??Nancy Vogel, covered state government as a reporter for the Los Angeles Times. She also worked at The Sacramento Bee, ‚??covering various issues, including water policy, from 1990 to 2000.‚?? Then Vogel took a job with¬†the¬†Senate Office of Oversight and Outcomes¬†as a principal consultant. Her colleagues at the Senate Office of Oversight and Outcomes were¬†John Hill, formerly a reporter with The Sacramento Bee, and Mark Arax, a former reporter for the Los Angeles Times.

‚??Vogel now works for the¬†Department of Water Resources¬†as the Director of Public Affairs.‚?Ě

If Baroness DiFi had her way, the government-MSM axis would be all you heard from. The truth never would get out.

But thanks tot he New Media, the truth shall set you free.

 

Written By

Advertisement
Advertisement

TRENDING NOW:

archive

DiFi attacks new media journalists

This article originally appeared on watchdog.com.

A year ago California voters gave Sen. Dianne Feinstein another landslide victory even though she refused to debate her opponent, Elizabeth Emken, who for once was a decent GOP candidate. DiFi must believe she’s in the House of Lords.

Now Baroness DiFi¬†wants to define as a ‚Äújournalist‚Ä̬†only those in MainStream Media. New media would be considered peons with no First Amendment protections. Matt Drudge, the most famous and influential of the New Media Journalists,¬†tweeted that she was a ‚ÄúFascist.‚ÄĚ

What‚Äôs so great about the MainStream Media anyway? In 2003, Judith Miller of the august New York Times, the most prestigious newspaper ever,¬†stovepiped¬†lies about Saddam Hussein‚Äôs ‚Äúweapons of mass destruction‚ÄĚ from the Republican Bush administration into the pages of her newspaper.

Then there was the infamous Pulitzer Prize that went to the MSM‚Äôs second most influential paper, the Washington Post, for a manufactured story by Janet Cooke, ‚ÄúJimmy‚Äôs World,‚ÄĚ about a supposed 8-year-old heroin addict.

Baroness DiFi’s position is especially embarrassing for Silicon Valley, whose billionaire investors mostly backed her. They’ve built the infrastructure of alternative media that, finally, take us outside the government-MainStream Media axis, and their own senator stabs them in the back! Baroness DiFi still wants to live in the Dark Ages of 1993, the year before the Web Awakening of 1994.

Journalists join government

But it is understandable why Baroness DiFi takes that view. As Breitbart reported, 15 journalists (using the Baroness DiFi definition) have joined the Obama administration.

And just last week Katy Grimes reported here on CalWatchDog.com on how more than a dozen state journalists now work for the California state government’s multitudinous departments and bureaus. Just a snippet from that article:

‚ÄúNancy Vogel, covered state government as a reporter for the Los Angeles Times. She also worked at The Sacramento Bee, ‚Äėcovering various issues, including water policy, from 1990 to 2000.‚Äô Then Vogel took a job with¬†the¬†Senate Office of Oversight and Outcomes¬†as a principal consultant. Her colleagues at the Senate Office of Oversight and Outcomes were¬†John Hill, formerly a reporter with The Sacramento Bee, and Mark Arax, a former reporter for the Los Angeles Times.

‚ÄúVogel now works for the¬†Department of Water Resources¬†as the Director of Public Affairs.‚ÄĚ

If Baroness DiFi had her way, the government-MSM axis would be all you heard from. The truth never would get out.

But thanks tot he New Media, the truth shall set you free.

 

TRENDING NOW:

THE TRUTH ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING: REAL THREAT OR HYSTERIA?

archive

Dystopia Alert: A Decimating National Debt

archive

Guest Columnist: Why We Must Have a Border Wall

archive

Rising Social Agenda Brings Luster to Qualified Dividends

archive

Connect